So possibilities I see:
- McIver is real, and did in fact ghost-write the speech that Melania claimed she wrote herself.
- McIver is real, and is being put out as a lightning rod to take the heat off Melania or speechwriters Trump needs.
- McIver is a composite personality - a pen name used within the Trump organisation by multiple people to create a sense of continuity? The persona is now being sacrificed.
Whoever she is, she has a consistent history within the Trump organisation, but that's all.
If I'm following correctly it went something like this:
- Melania says in interview on Trumpforce 1 that she wrote the speech herself with "as little help as possible"
- Melania delivers her speech, and some of Michelle Obamas
- Trump campaign says Melania's "team of writers" looked at things she took inspiration from
- Various Trump spokespeople said there was no plagarism.
- Now they say it was one person, who is mysteriously absent?
In the source code of the archived page, most of the resources have this datestamp.
I’m not sure whether that signifies the original creation date, though.
Nope that’s the archive’s date (see, it’s in the archive.org page URL too).
The Wayback machine isn't very useful though - it's far from an exhaustive index and often only crawls things after it is told to, or finds links on various sources. So if the Meredith McIver page was linked from news sites recently, then that might be why the Wayback machine has only just noticed it.
A Google search for her associated with Simon & Schuster limited from Jan 1, 2000 to Jan 1, 2016 find quite a number of hits that would seem to support her existence... While Google's dates are far from perfect either (based often on information in the page's text, rather than the date Google first saw the content) it does seem to suggest she's really who they suggest she is.
Hopefully Wilderpeople and Tickled get some AUS distribution, we shall see I guess …
Both should find there way into at least some theatres in Aus... Keep your eyes peeled.
Just said “the psychos are coming”. It was about as bad as Gallery reporting gets. You can watch it here if you like.
And bingo it worked. The PM has successfully turned all the Kiwis in Australia awaiting deportation into degenerate criminal scum. It doesn't matter that many are simply not accounted for on the list of villainy, there is a a big scary number of bad criminals and they're coming here!
The narrative is changed, now Labour and others who want to defend the human rights of those citizens will have to explain why they are so interested in helping criminals instead of [insert unrelated social issue or group].
I like the Dead Cat theory and I'm convinced it's used at times... But I don't think this was one.
I think this was an opportunity to both score points against the opposition and also to re-frame the detainees to limit public sympathy for them (and by extension those opposition parties who are supporting them).
The 'truth', as spoken by the Prime Minister and soon widely reported by the media, is that the majority of the detainees are violent sex offenders. The PM even has a document to prove it, although he doesn't think he'll be able to make it public.
Not sure how opposition parties can fight against that now. They are unlikely to have useful data to refute it.
I can't help thinking that Apple's embracing of ad-blocking on iOS is only going to make things worse.
We ask a lot, but we're willing to trade very little in return. I balk at a paywall and apparently I don't want to see ads either, but by god they'd better not get rid of any of those journalists, how dare they!?!
Why publicly present a shortlist of 40 if only presenting 4 for the vote?
That's an interesting question actually - was there public consultation after the longlist was published? I don't remember any being promoted.
If not, what was the point of that?
Everyone seems to think it’s important that a child could draw the flag.
Nothing horrifies me more. What are you trying to do, indoctrinate your children into blind loyalty to a flag? It’s been done before a whole bunch of times, with horrifying results.
It's a shorthand for simplicity.
Think instead about the many mediums in which it might be desirable to be able to reproduce the flag - from embroided to painted on a face... even baked in a cake. In monochrome or with a limited palette.
Basically a flag should be easy to reproduce from memory, with simply implements even when constrained by materials.
(The same usually goes for logos too)